i.rd.'o 


*  PRINCETON,  N.  J.  ^ 


Presented    by    \   VG^SX  ^^^fS/Y^VV^V-V 


I 


BV  811  .S567 

Shotwell,  Albert,  1846-1898 

Scripture  baptism 


Scripture  Baptism, 


'Crtpture  ^a^ttsin 


THE 

Mode  and  Subjects. 


SERM.ON, 

Rev.  a.  SHOTWELL. 


PUBLISHED  BY  REQUBST. 


ST.  LOUIS: 

PRESBYTERIAN    PUBLISHING    COMPANY 


INTRODUCTORY 

TO  THE  THIRD   EDITION; 


This  little  volume  is  a  sermon  preached  in  compliance 
with  the  special  request  of  a  number  of  friends  connected 
with  the  Methodist,  Cumberland  and  Old  School  Presby- 
terian Churches.  The  circumstances  which  caused  the  re- 
quest were  these. 

In  that  community  it  was  the  custom  for  all  the  Christians 
of  the  place  to  unite  in  one  congregation  on  the  Sabbath, 
each  denomination  occupying  one  Sabbath  of  the  month. 

On  one  occasion  the  pastor  of  the  Baptist  church,  with  a 
great  deal  of  bitterness  of  words  and  manner,  hurled  his 
anathemas  against  all  who  did  not  believe  that  immersion 
is  the  only  mode  of  Baptism,  saying,  among  other  things,  that 
any  person  who  would  i-ead  the  Bible  must  know  that  im- 
mersion alone  was  right,  and  that  there  was  no  shadow  of 
foundation  in  the  Bible  for  any  other  mode — that  none  but 
the  immersed  were  baptized — that  none  others  were  mem- 


INTRODUCTORY.      - 

Dersof  the  Church— that  none  others  had  any  right  to  preach, 
or  administer  the  ordinances  of  the  Church. 

Such  uncharitable  assertions,  made,  in  the  presence, of  a 
congregation  more  than  half  of  Avhom  were  members  of 
other  denominations,  and  m^de  in  the  hearing  of  many,  young 
people,  who  are  too  ready  to  receive  an.  ttndispiited  prop- 
osition as  true,  no  matter  how  absurd  it  may  be,  awakened 
the  desire,  even  among  those  who  had  always  disliked  and 
avoided  these  controversies  about  the  inon-essentials  of 
Christian  practice,  to  have  the  assertions  refuted.  They  ac- 
cordingly requested  the  author  to- present  the  scripture  side  of 
this  question.  This  he  did  with,  the  sincere  desire  and  pray- 
er that  his  Words  and  manner  ipightb^  seasoned  with  broth- 
erly^ kindness  and  Charity. 

The  request  for  publication  followed  the  delivery  of  the 
sermon.  The  little  book  was  very  popular.  Two  editions 
were  soon  exhausted,  and  for  a  considerable  time  it  has  been 
out  of  print.  Repeated  requests  have  been  made  for  a  new 
edition  and  incompliance  with  them  this  /y^zW  edition  is  sent 

OUti 

In  preparing  it  for  the  press  the  author  has  thought  best 
to  preserve  the  sermon  form,  in  which  it  was  first  delivered 
because  the  want  of  time,  which  he  could  spare  from  other 
duties,  prevented  such  a.  review  ^as  would  be  necessary 
to  change  it  into  regular  book  form,  and  because  many 
friends,  who  expressed  their,  approbation  of  it,  thought  its 


INTRODUCTORY.    - 

T. 

popularity  would  b.e,  diminished  rather  than  increased  by 
any  material'  ch^ange  either  in  the  matter  or  style  of  the 
work.  '"  .  '     '"'   ■  ' 

Such  as,  it  is^  it  is.  sent  forth  upon  its  mission  with  the 
hope  that  it  may  do  SQme  good  in  clearing  away  the  doubts 
which  hang  around'  this  subject,  in  the  minds  of  some  of 

our  best,  churqh  members,  because  they  seldom  hear  any 

i>:::  i>?st  c.i!  •.■.:    :;i  rn  ,  .:..    .  ■  * 

thins  said  upon  our  side  of  the  question. 


SCRIPTURE  BAPTISM. 


"For  as  many  of  you  as  have  been  baptised  into  Christ 
have  put  on  Christ.  There  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek, 
there  is  neither  bond  nor  free,  tVere  is  neither  male  nor 
female,  for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  if  ye  be 
Christ's  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed  and  heirs  according  to 
the  promise." — Galatians  iii:2-j,  2g. 

When  the  Samaritans  sent  to  Nehemiah, 
seeking  a  controversy  with  him  relative  to 
the  rebuilding  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  he 
replied  to  them,  "I  am  doing  a  great  work 
so  that  I  cannot  come  down  ;  why  should 
the  work  cease  while  I  leave  it  and  come 
down  to  you  ?  "  With  similar  feelings  have 
I  always  looked  upon  this  whole  controversy 
about  baptism. 

The  minister  of  Jesus  Christ  is  engaged 
in  too  important  a  work  for  him  to  let  that 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  / 

work  cease  while  he  comes  down  into  a  field 
of  strife,  which,  instead  of  cultivating  peace, 
harmony,  charity,  and  brotherly  kindness 
among  the  members  of  Christ,  and  causing 
the  world  to  say  "see  how  these  Christians 
love  one  another,"  too  often  stirs  up  bitter- 
ness, hatred,  envy  and  strife  among  the 
children  of  one  common  Father. 

In  Paul's  day  the  same  kind  of  strife  arose 
about  circumcision,  the  then-visible  seal  of 
membership  in  the  church,  and  he  reproved 
it,  saying :  ''All  the  law  is  fulfilled  in  this, 
thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself:  but 
if  ye  bite  and  devour  one  another,  take  heed 
that  ye  be  not  consumed  one  of  another." 

For  this  reason,  during  a  ministry  of 
twenty  years,  I  have  never  felt  it  my  duty 
to  enter  into  this  strife,  but  have  preferred 
to  "glory"  only  in  the  cross  of  Jesus  Christ, 
by  which  the  world  "is  crucified  unto  me 
and  I  unto  vhe  world." 

For  several  generations  this  controversy 
has  troubled  the  church,  some  of  the  best  of 
men  have  been  arrayed  upon  the  different 
sides,  and  with  great  earnestness  and  zeal 


8  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

have  contended  for  the  opinions  which  they 
have  held.  It  is  not,  therefore,  a  question 
concerning  which  either  party  has  a  right  to 
be  uncharitable,  or  hurl  anathemas  against 
those  who  may  differ  from  us.  Christ  and 
his  apostles  did  not  deem  it  of  sufficient  im- 
portance to  give  any,  **thus  saith  the  Lord" 
concerning  it,  and  it  is  not  therefore  my 
duty,  nor  is  it  my  privilege  to  speak  unchar- 
itably, or  even  to  tJiink  uncharitably  of  those 
who  differ  from  me. 

I  have,  therefore,  all  my  life  preferred  to 
preach  truths  that  were  more  practical,  and 
thus  contend  against  our  common  enemy, 
rather  than  contend  with  brethren  who  come 
to  God  through  the  some  Mediator;  who 
have  had  their  hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil 
conscience  by  the  same  blood;  who  hope  in 
the  same  promises;  who  are  laboring  for  the 
glory  of  the  same  Saviour;  who  belong  to 
the  same  Catholic  church,  which  is  "built 
upon  the  prophets  and  apostles,  Jesus  Christ 
himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone,"  and 
with  whom  I  hope  for  ever  to  dwell  in  that 
world  where  Zion's  watchmen  shall  all  see 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  9 

eye  to  eye  and  none  any  more  say,  "I  am 
for  Paul,  and  I  for  Apollos,  and  I  for  Ce- 
phas." 

Nor  would  I  to-day  have  deviated  from 
my  p.ast  course  if  it  had  not  been  my  oivn 
opinion,  as  well  as  the  opinion  of  those 
friends  who  requested  me  to  address  you  on 
this  subject,  that  our  silence  is  construed  to 
imply  that  we  were  unable  to  defend  our 
practice  on  Scripture  grounds. 

And  in  the  very  commencement  of  my  re- 
marks, I  wish  distinctly  to  state,  that  it  is  my 
desire  and  prayer  that  brotherly  kindness 
and  ch'irity  may  mark  all  my  words,  and 
that  nothing  savoring  of  bitterness  or  con- 
tempt for  my  immersing  brethren  may  be 
found  in  any  of  my  arguments;  and  if  in  the 
warmth  of  discussion  any  word  or  expres- 
sion may  seem  in  the  least  uncharitable,  I 
wish  before  hand  to  distinctly  disavow  any 
such  intention. 

My  own  opinions  are  firmly  fixed.  I  do 
beHeve  sincerely  that  we  practice-  the  mode 
of  baptism  practiced  in  the  New  Testament 
times,  and  that  not  only  have  we  good  author- 


10  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

ity  for  infant  baptism,  but  that  it  is  as  much 
our  duty  to  consecrate  our  children  in  bap- 
tism as  to  consecrate  ourselves.  There  are 
however  good  men  and  wise  men,  men  whom 
I  delighted  to  call  brethren,  who  differ  with 
us  on  these  points,  and  though  I  believe 
them  to  be  in  error  I  still  believe  them  to  be 
sincere  in  their  profession;  and  if  they  have 
the  siibsta7ice,  baptism  with  the  Holy  Spirit, 
I  do  not  believe  that  God  will  reject  them 
because  of  an  error  concerning  the  xn^YQ/orm 
of  the  shadow.  If  God's  Spirit  has  been 
ponied  upon  their  hearts  I  welcome  them  as' 
true  members  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  even 
while  I  think  they  have  selected  a  very  im- 
proper mode  of  baptism  with  which  to  sym- 
bolize the  pouring  out  of  that  Spirit  upon 
them.  If  by  faith  they  rest  upon  the  Sav- 
iour for  salvation,  I  am  glad  to  welcome 
them  as  members  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and 
cordially  invite  them  to  sit  with  me  and 
partake  of  the  emblem  of  that  precious  blood, 
although  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  they 
have  selected  a  mode  of  baptism  which  very 
poorly   and    iraproperly     symbolizes    that 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  I  1 

"blood  of  sprinklmg  that  speakelh    better 
things  than  that  of  Abel." 

THE    QUESTION. 

My  first  desire  is  that  we  distinctly  under- 
stand the  question  which  is  before  us.  It  is 
not  whether  baptism  is  a  duty  or  not — this  all 
admit — nor  whether  immersion  is  one  mode 
of  baptism  or  not.  It  is  not  whether  im- 
mersion, or  any  other  mode^  is  more  or  less 
convenient;  nor  w  \clher  it  is  or  is  not  a  cross\ 
nor  whether  it  is  shame,  or  fear,  or  pride 
which  keeps  men  from  being  immersed;  nor 
whether  immersers  are  good  men  or  bad, 
whether  wise  or  unwise.  These  are  not  the 
questions.  The  one  at  issue  at  the  present 
time  is,  whether  immersion  is  the  only  mode 
of  baptism?  Whether  all  who  have  never 
been  immersed  are  unbaptized,  and  there- 
fore out  of  the  church  of  Christ,  and  there- 
fore entitled  to  none  of  the  promises  which 
God  has  given  to  his  professed  followers?' 
Whether  these  Methodist,  and  Presbyterian, 
and  Cumberland  and  Episcopalian  christians 
are  usurping  privileges  which  do  not  belong 
to  theip  when  they  come  to  the  table  of  the 


12  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

church's  Lord  ?  Whether  they  are  ''aliens 
from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  strangers 
to  the  covenant  of  promise,"  and  therefore 
have  no  right  or  title  to  the  children's  bread 
^  which  the  Saviour  has  provided  for  the  mem- 
bers of  his  household. 

It  is  because  the  question  has  assumed 
this  form,  and  because  our  immersing  breth- 
ren have  so  stated  it,  that  I  have  felt  con- 
strained to  comply  with  your  request  and 
hold  up  its  answer  before  you  this  day. 

If  our  immersing  brethren  had  only  said 
"we  have  the  best  mode  of  baptism,"  or  "the 
most  impressive  mode,"  or  if  they  had  only 
said  "our  mode  is  nearest  to  the  scripture 
model,"  I  could  not  have  complained  much 
of  their  opinion,  for  their  belief  concerning 
their  mode  would  have  been  just  the  same 
as  my  own  belief  concerning  our  mode. 

The  question  at  issue  then  is  whether  im- 
mersion is  the  only  mode  of  baptism,  and 
whether  none  but  those  who  are  immersed 
belong  to  the  visible  church  of  God,  and  are 
entitled  to  any  of  its  privileges  or  authorized 
to  administer  any  of  its  ordinances. 


SCRIPTURE    BAKTISM.  I  3 

And  this  question  becomes  the  more  im- 
portant because  it  not  only  expels  from  our 
Father's  house  and  excludes  from  our  Fath- 
er's table  i9-20ths  of  the  Christian  world, 
but  it  declares  that  99-iooths  of  all  that  have 
ever  professed  love  for  the  Saviour  and  re- 
verence for  his  name  have  died  out  of  the 
visible  church  of  God.  Nay,  more;  if  these 
assertions  are  true,  and  immersion  is  the  only- 
mode,  and  if  all  not  immersed  are  unauthor- 
ized to  administer  church  ordinances,  then 
we  have  no  baptism,  no  Lord's  supper,  our 
immersing  brethren  themselves  are  not  bap- 
tised,  and  the  church  of  Christ  has  long  since 
passed  away.  The  prophecy  has  failed  and 
"the  gates  of  hell  have  prevailed  against 
her  " 

For  to  claim  an  unbroken  succession  for 
baptism  by  immersion  is  to  fly  in  the  face  of 
all  evidence  both  divine  and  human. 

Let  us  look  then  to  the  law  and  the  testi- 
mony on  the  points  at  issue. 

PLAIN     PROPOSITIONS. 

I  would  in  the  Jirst  place  lay  down  a  few 
propositions    which  I  think  none    here     will- 


14  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

deny,  and  therefore  I  will  not  stop  to  argue 

them. 

'  '^  I  St.      The  Bible  came  from    God,   and   it 

Cv-»ntains  all  that  is  essential  for  man  Xoknow 

concerning    God,  and  enjoins  all  that  it  ig 

essential  for  man  to  do  in  order  to  be  sav^ 

ed. 

2d.  God  knows  the  force  of  all  lano-ua^e 
and  the  meaning  of  all  words. 

3d.  Any  article  of  faith  which  is  not 
plainly  enjoined,  cannot  be  essential  to  calva- 
tion.  "^ 

4th.  If  any  particular/^.^r;;/  is  essential  to 
the  validity  of  any  ordinance,  then  the  mode 
ot  observing  that  ordinance  will  be  fully  and 
clearly  de-ftned  by  God  in  his  word. 

Now  if  these  propositions  are  true,  (and 
I  do  not  think  any  Christian  will  deny  them,) 
then  we  are  driven  to  this  conclusion,  either 
the  book  which  we  call  the  bible  is  not  from 
God,  or  God  did  not  intend  to  teach  that 
immersion  in  water  is  the  only  true  baptism. 

Nineteen-twentieths  of  those  who  love  the 
Bible  and  who  prayerfully  seek  to  know  and 
to  do  what  God  has  commanded  in  his  book, 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  1 5 

after  carefully  studying  what  it  teaches,  have 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  baptism  by  im- 
mersion is  not  the  only  baptism,  and  almost  all 
of  this  nineteen-twentieths  of  the  Christian 
world  will  cordially  unite  with  me  in  the  fol- 
lowing summary  of  my  belief  on  this  point : 

WHAT  I  DO  NOT  BELIEVE. 

1st.  I  do  not  believe  that  baptism  by  im- 
mersion is  any  where  taught  in  the  word  of 
God,  either  by  the  meaning  of  the  word 
baptizo  or  by  the  use  of  the  words  transla- 
ted "in,"  "into,"  or  'fout  of"  in  our  English 
version  of  the  scriptures. 

2d.  I  do  7tot  believe  that  the  design  of  the 
ordinance  points  to  immersion  as  the  mode 
of  baptism  taught  in  scripture. 

3d.  I  do  not  believe  that  the  circum- 
stances recorded  point  to  a  single  instance  of 
immersion  either  by  John,  or  by  Christ,  or 
by  His  apostles. 

4th.  I  do  not  beheve  that  there  is  any- 
thing in  the  Bible  which  is  opposed  to  the 
right  of  the  believing  parents  to  bring  their 
children  with  them  into  the  Church  of  God 
by  baptism. 


l6  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

WHAT  I  DO  BELIEVE. 

But  on  the  other  hand,  I  do  believe  that 
the  word  baptizo  is  in  several  places  in  scrip- 
ture used  in  the  sense  of  sprinkling  or  pour- 
ing; and  that  the  words  translated  "in,"  **in- 
to,"  and  "out  of,"  could  with  more  propriety- 
be  translated  to,  at^  dind  from. 

2d.  I  believe  that  the  design  of  this  ordi- 
nance of  baptism  points  to  sprinkling  or 
pouring  as  the  proper  mode. 

3d.  I  believe  that  the  circumstances  re- 
corded in  scripture  make  it  certain  in  sever- 
al instances,  and  probable  in  every  instance, 
that  sprinkling  or  pouring  was  the  mode 
used. 

4th.  I  believe  that  the  scriptures  plainly 
teach  that  it  is  not  only  the  privilege  but 
the  duty  of  believing  parents  to  consecrate 
their  children  by  baptism  to  God.  And 
these  are  the  positions  I  purpose  to  maintain 
and  defend. 

BAPTIZO  DOES  NOT  TEACH  IMMERSION. 

Baptism  by  immersion  is  not  taught  in 
the  word  of  God  by  the  meaning  of  the  word 
"baptizoJ'     I  know  that  I  am  met  here  by 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  1/ 

our  immersing  brethren  with  the  assertion 
of  just  the  reverse  of  this  position.  Let  us 
appeal  to  scripture,  the  only  infallible  rule 
of  faith  and  practice. 

In  our  English  New  Testament  the  word 
Baptize  in  some  of  its  forms  is  found  eighty- 
nine  trnics,  and  in  the  Greek  ninety-three 
times,  and  in  not  one  of  these  places  is  there 
anything  w^iich  implies  that  immersion  is 
the  only  or  the  true  meaning  of  the  word.  In 
classic  writings  the  word  has  various  mean- 
ings; but  the  common  meaning  attached  to 
it  in  scripture  is  zuashing  or  cleaning,  without 
any  reference,  in  the  word,  to  the  manner  in 
which  that  cleaning  is  performed.  /  _, 

It  is  true  there  are  some  places  where  the 
baptism  might  have  been  performed  by  im- 
mersion, but  no  place  where  it  is  said  that  it 
was  so  performed,  and  no  place  where  the 
sense  would  be  injured  if  we  should  prove 
that  it  was  hy  sprinkling  or poiirijig,  while  on 
the  other  hand  there  are  several  places;where 
it  is  easy  to  show  that  the  word  does  not 
and  cannot  mean  immersion. 


Immerser  Instructed,  p.  85. 


l8  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

Take  for  example,  Mark  vii  :  4,  where  in 
the  Greek  this  word  is  used  twice,  and  see 
if  it  does  not  mean  something  else  than  im- 
mersion. 

Speaking  of  the  Pharisees  when  they 
"come  from  the  market,  except  they  baptize 
they  eat  not,  and  many  other  things  there 
be  which  they  receive  to  hold,  as  the  baptiz- 
ing of  cups  and  pots,  and  brazen  vessels, 
and  tables  (or  couches)."  How  absurd  to 
say  the  Pharisee  must  immerse  himself  every 
time  he  came  from  market^  or  that  he  im- 
mersed his  couch. 

Let  us  look  at  another  passage.  This  is 
1st  Cor.  X  :  i,  2.  Paul  says  the  the  Israel- 
ites were  "all  baptized  unto  Moses  in  the 
cloud  and  in  the  sea."  Here  immersion  is 
impossible,  for  they  went  through  on  dry 
ground.  Hence  baptized  does  not  mean 
immersion  here. 

Turn  now  to  the  9th  chapter  of  Hebrews, 
and  i®th  verse,  where  Paul  speaks  of  "divers 
washings."     In  the  Greek  it  is  dca(poiioc(;  f-ian- 
ztaiiocQ^'diverS'  baptisms''    No  one  acquaint- 
ed with  scripture  will  deny  that  Paul  is  re- 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  19 

fcrring  to  the  Jewish  ritual.  Now,  what  were 
the  divers  baptisms  of  which  he  speaks,  and 
how  performed?  A  reference  to  the  Old 
Testament  convinces  us  that  almost  all  were 
by  sprinkling. 

When  Aaron  was  consecrated  a  priest 
Moses  must  sprinkle  blood  upon  him. 

When  the  Israelites  entered  into  covenant 
with  God  at  Sinai  their  vows  were  conse- 
crated by  sprinkling. 

When  the  people  w^ere  to  be  cleansed 
from  any  uncleanhness  the  blood  of  their 
sacrifices  was  to  be  spjijikled  upon  them. 

So  might  I  go  on  and  quote  scores  of  pas- 
sages, all  showing  that  almost  all  the  divers 
baptisms  of  the  Jews  were  by  sp7  inkling.  In 
Hebrews,  9th  chapter,  the  13th,  17th  and 
2 1st  verses,  Paul  speaks  of  three  of  these 
diverse  baptisms.  One  is  as  follows:  **  If 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  and  the  ashes 
of  a  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean  sanctifieth 
to  the  purifying  of -he  flesh,  etc."  A  second 
IS  :  **  When  Moses  had  spoken  every  precept 
to  all  the  people  according  to  the  law,  he 
took  the  blood  of  calves  and  goats,  with  wa- 


20  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

ter,  and  scarlet  wool  and  hysop^  and  sprink- 
led both  the  book  and  all  the  people."  The 
third  instance  which  he  gives  is  :  "  More- 
over he  sprinkled  likewise  with  blood  both 
the  tabernacle  and  all  the  vessels  of  the  min- 
istry." Surely  Paul  did  not  believe  that 
baptize  always  meant  immersion. 

Another  proof  that  the  word  baptizo  does 
not  always  mean  immersion  is  found  in  the 
history  of  the  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost.  The  promise  had 
been  given  by  John,  and  repeated  again  and 
again,  that  the  disciples  should  be  baptized 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire. 

Joel  in  his  prophecy  referred  to  this  bap- 
tism twice,  under  the  expression  "I  will/^?/r 
out  my  spirit  upon  them."  When  the  pre- 
dictions of  John  the  Baptist,  and  of  Joel,  and 
of  Christ  himself,  came  to  pass,  how  were 
the  disciples  baptized  ?  Not  by  immersion, 
for  the  Spirit  wdiS  potired  ont  upon  them,  and 
the  cloven  tongues  of  fire  descended,  and 
rested  upon  them.  Surely  it  is  another  place 
where  baptism  does  not  mean  immersion: 

Thus  I  think  I  have  established  my  first 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  21 

position,  that  the  word  baplizo,  as  it  is  used 
in  scripture,  does  not  always  mean  immer- 
sion, and  that,  therefore,  nothing  can  be 
proved  from  the  meaning  of  the  word. 

Nor  in  the  second  place  can  anything  be 
determined  by  the  use  of  the  words  trans- 
lated "z;/,"  ''into;'  and  ''out  of!' 

These  words  are  sv,  e^c,  £^,  and  u-tzo.  The 
first  of  these,  used  relative  to  John's  baptiz- 
ing m  Jordan  and  in  Enon,  is  used  about 
3(X>  times  in  tfie  Greek  Testament.  More 
than  lOO  times  it  is  translated  *'at,"  and 
more  than  150  times  it  is  translated  "zt/zV/^."* 
It  does  not  signify  and  is  not  translated 
under  in  the  whole  New  Testament. '- '  ^ 

Etc  is  found  more  than  600  times,  and  has 
at  least  twelve  different  meanings.  It  never 
means  ''tinder'"  in  the  New  Testament.  It 
might  with  just  as  much  propriety  be  trans- 
lated "to"  or  "unto"  as ''in"  or  "into."  To 
say  that  Philip  and  the  Eunuch  went  down 
cis  the  water  does  not  imply  that  they  wet 
even  the  soles  of  their  feet.     It  might  with 

*Bible  baptism. 


22  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

equal  propriety  be  said,  they  went  down  to 
the  water ,  as  to  say  into  the  water. 

So  tx.  defines  nothing  as  to  the  mode  of 
baptism.  It  is  found  more  than  300  times  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  nearly  200  of  these 
times  it  is  translated  "from  ,"  and  where 
it  is  translated  "out  of"  the  water, 
it  ought  to  have  been  ''from''  the  water,  if 
a  majority  of  tzvo  cases  out  of  three  is  any 
test  of  its  meaning. 

And  the  word  a;ro,  translated  "out  of,"  is 
in  the  same  condition.  It  literally  means 
from,  and  in  250  out  of  300  times  is  so  trans- 
lated. Surely  we  cannot  unchurch  i9-20ths 
of  the  Christian  world  on  such  uncertain 
grounds  as  the  meaning  of  these  words. 

Having  thus  seen  that  nothing  can  be  de- 
termined relative  to  the  mode  of  baptism 
from  the  meaning  of  the  word  baptizo,  be- 
cause it  does  not  always  mean  immerse,  and 
in  most  if  not  all  the  places  used  in  the  Bible 
cannot  mean  immerse,  and  having  proved 
also  that  nothing  can  be  determined  by  the 
use  of  the  words  translated  "in,"  "into,"  and 
"out   of,"   because  in  a  large   majority   of 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  23 

places  in  the  New  Testament  they  mean 
simply  **to"  and  "from,"  let  us  see  if  any- 
thing can  be  determined  from  the  design  of 
baptism  relative  to  the  mode. 

DESIGN  OF  BAPTISM. 

The  design  of  baptism  is  to  signify  the 
necessity  of  regeneration  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 
There  were  two  sacraments  under  the  Old 
Testament  form  of  the  Church,  each  of  which 
had  its  distinct  signification.  One  was  the 
Passover  Supper,  which  was  designed  to 
foreshadow  in  an  especial  manner  the  work 
of  the  scco7id  person  of  the  trinity.  It  point- 
ed to  the  Son's  work  in  providing  salvation 
by  His  blood.  The  lamb  must  be  s/ai;i,  the 
blood  must  be  sprinkled  and  the  flesh  must 
be  eaten,  and  thus  was  the  Church  taught 
the  great  truth  of  the  gospel  that  Christ,  the 
second  person  of  the  trinity,  would  give  His 
blood  and  body  for  the  redemption  of  His 
people.  In  the  place  of  that  Passover  Sup- 
per Christ  gave  us  the  Lord's  Supper,  where 
the  sprinkled  blood  is  set  forth  in  the  cup, 
and  tlie  flesh  that  was  eaten  is  set  forth  in 
the  bread,  and  the   great  truth  is  held  up 


24  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

that  Christ,  our  Passover  lamb,  is  slain  for 
us. 

The  other  sacrament  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment was  circumcision,  and  it  was  designed 
to  foreshadow  the  work  of  the  third  person 
of  the  trinity.  It  pointed  especially  to  the 
work  of  regeneration  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

In  the  place  of  this,  Christ  instituted  bap- 
tism, and  by  the  application  of  water  He 
taught  the  necessity  of  the  cleansing  of  the 
heart  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Its  primary  refer- 
ence is  to  the  work  of  the  third  person 
of  the  trinity,  which  He  performs  upon 
the  heart  of  men  ;  but  it  has  a  secondary 
reference  to  the  blood,  by  the  sprinkling  of 
which  the  right  to  the  regenerating  influ- 
ences of  that  Spirit  has  been  purchased  for 
the  believer. 

Now  the  first  sacrament  Is  beautifully  and 
exactly  symbolic  of  what  it  is  designed  to 
teach.  The  body  was  broken  and  the  blood 
was  shed — so  the  bread  is  broken  and  the 
wine  poured  out. 

Through  this  broken  body  and  shed  blood 
the  believer  receives  his  life  and  nourishment 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  ^5 

and  strength.  So  in  the  sacrament  he  must 
eat  the  bread  and  drink  the  wine,  thus  sym- 
boHzing  that  he  must  feed  upon  his  Savior. 
Now  this  same  analogy  will  run  through 
the  second  sacrament  if  it  is  observed  accord- 
ing to  the  scripture  model.  It  is  designed 
to  symbolize  cle arising.  Hence  zvater  must 
be  used,  and  that  the  shadow  may  fully  re- 
present the  substance,  it  must,  according  to 
the  prophecy  concerning  it,  be  clean  water. 
It  is  designed  to  symbolize  the  work  of  a 
pure  spirit  in  contradistinction  to  a  bodily 
form,  hence  a  fluid  is  used.  To  symbolize 
bUtod  He  uses  wine.  To  symbolize  Spirit 
and  blood,  both  participating  in  cleasing, 
He  uses  water. 

Now  another  thing  is  necessary  beside 
symbolizing  the  tiling  to  be  done  and  the 
instrument  of  doing  it.  How  is  it  done  ?  The 
body  was  broken,  therefore  break  the  bread. 
The  blood,  the  hfe,  was  poured  out;  there- 
fore pour  out  the  wine. 

The  beHever  is  to  be  nourished  and  live 
through  the  broken  body  and  shed  blood, 
therefore  eat  the  bread  and  drink  the  wine. 


26  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

So  here  in  baptism  the  Spirit  is  the  instru- 
ment— tise  water.  The  heart  is  to  be  cleans- 
ed— use  clean  water.  The  Spirit  is  to  be 
appHed  to  the  heart — apply  the  water  to  the 
subject.  The  Spirit  is  always  described  as 
poured  out,  and  the  blood  by  which  he  has 
been  purchased  is  said  to  be  sprinkled,  there- 
fore, \YQ  pour  02tt  the  water  and  sprinkle  it 
upon  the  subject. 

Now  with  these  facts  before  us  I  candidly 
ask  whether  I  am  not  right  in  my  second 
position,  that  the  design  of  the  ordinance 
does  ;/^/ point  to  immersion  as  the  oiily  mode, 
or  as^  mode  taught  m  the  scripture.  When 
the  subject  is  said  to  be  cleansed  by  the 
sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  the 
pouring  out  of  the  Holy  Spirit  into  his  heart, 
I  do  not  symbolize  either  when  I  immense  him 
under  water, 

THE  CIRCUMSTANCES     POINT  TO    SPRINKLING. 

But  this  brings  us  to  my  third  position.  I 
do  not  believe  that  the  circumstances  re- 
corded point  to  a  single  instance  of  immer- 
sion either  hy  John,  or  by  Christ,  or  by  His 
apostles  ;  but  on  the  other  hand  I  do  believe 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  2/ 

that  the  circumstances  recorded  in  Scrip- 
ture make  it  certain  in  several  instances, 
and  probable  in  every  instances,  that  sprink- 
ling  or  pouring  was  the  mode  used. 

The  first  passage  which  I  notice  is  John's 
baptism  of  the  multitude  who  came  out  to 
him.  Here  the  probabilities  are  all  against 
immersion,  and  nothing  is  in  favor  of  it  ex- 
cept the  use  of  the  prepositions  translated 
into  and  ont  of,  the  first  of  which  I  have 
shown  is  in  two  cases  out  of  three  rendered 
"  at,"  and  the  other  in  five  out  of  six  ren- 
dered ''from!' 

The  multitude  was  too  great,  even  at  the 
smallest  computation,  for  immersion  to  have 
been  the  mode,  and  then  no  changes  of  rai- 
ment are  mentioned. 

John's  ministry  was  only  about  one  and  a 
half  years,  and  yet  it  is  said  that  Jerusalem 
and  all  Judea  were  baptized  of  him.  One 
writer  computes  that  if  one  half  of  ''all" 
came  to  him,  he  would  have  had  to  baptize 
5,000  daily  for  500  days. 

I  rely  however  very  little  upon  such  argu- 


28  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

meiits  as  this,  although  they  have  some  force 
in  confirmation  of  other  arguments. 

BAPTISM  OF  JESUS. 

John  baptized  our  Saviour,  and  as  there  is 
no  mention  of  any  change  of  mode  I  suppose 
He  was  baptized  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
multitude  who  crowded  to  John's  baptism. 
Concerning  Jesus'  baptism  it  is  plain  that  it 
was  by  sprinkling.     Look  at  the  facts. 

WJiy  was  Jesus  baptized  at  all  ?  He  had 
110  sin,  and  therefore  He  was  not  baptized  for 
the  same  cause  as  the  rest,  "  unto  repent- 
ance," and  lest  we  might  make  a  mistake 
here,  God  as  well  as  John  bears  testimony. 
John  says:  "  /  have  need  to  be  baptized  of 
Thee,"  and  God  said  :  *'  This  is  My  beloved 
Son  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased!' 

The  design  of  His  baptism  must,  therefore, 
have  been  different.  What  was  it?  Jesus 
was  just  about  to  enter  upon  His  public  work 
as  priest  for  His  people;  He  was  preparing 
to  offer  the  great  sacrifice,  which  all  the 
sacrifices  which  had  gone  before  had  fore- 
shadowed. The  law  of  sacrifices,  which  was 
still  in  force,  had  certain  forms  which  were 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  29 

essential  to  the  legal  preparation  of  any 
priest  for  his  office.  One  thing  was — proper 
age.  He  must  be  thirty  years  old.  Num. 
iv :  3,  35,  39,  47.  Luke  says  of  Him,  where 
he  records  His  baptism :  "  He  began  to  be 
about  thirty  years  of  age." — Luke  iii:  23.  An- 
other important  thing  is:  He  must  be  washed. 
It  is  this  washing  preparatory  to  His  work  to 
which  He  alludes  in  His  conversation  with 
John.  The  whole  question  of  the  mode  of 
our  Saviour's  baptism  by  John,  and  of  <?//the 
other  baptisms  by  John,  turns  upon  this  wasJi- 
ing  preparatory  to  His  work.  The  form  of 
this  washing  is  distinctly  laid  down  in  Num- 
bers, 8th  chap.,  7th  verse  :  "  Thus  shalt  thou 
do  unto  them  to  cleanse  them :  sprinkle 
water  of  purifying  upon  them.'.'  To  my  own 
mind  it  is  clear  that  the  baptism  with  which 
John  baptized  our  Saviour  was  by  sprink- 
ling, and  therefore  that  John  practiced  this 
mode. 

I  have  my  opinion  of  the  manner  in  which 
John  performed  his  work.  I  believe  he 
stood  at  the  edge  of  the  water,  and  as  the 
multitude  passed  before  him  he  dipped  up 


30  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

the  water  and  baptized  them.  And  this 
agrees  with  many  very  old  paintings,  one  of 
which  represents  him  so  standing,  apparent- 
ly on  a  rock,  dind  pouring  the  water,  from 
what  appears  to  be  a  shell,  upon  the  heads 
of  the  people  as  they  move  in  procession  be- 
fore him  in  the  edge  of  the  water. 

JOHN  BAPTIZING    AT  ENON. 

But,  says  one,  is  it  not  said  that  he  bap- 
tized in  Enon  "  because  there  was  much  wa- 
ter" there? 

Yes  !  But  zuhere  was  Enon  and  what  was 
it  ?  It  was  only  a  few  miles  from  Jordan, 
and  it  is  not  to  be  believed  that  John  left 
that  river  to  go  to  Enon  because  the  Jordan 
did  not  furnish  water  enough  to  immerse  in. 
The  '*  much  water  "  must  have  been  for  some 
other  purpose  than  baptizing.  But  he  was 
baptizing  in  Enon.  Was  Enon  a  river?  I 
believe  nobody  says  so.  It  was  the  name  of 
a  place,  not  a  river,  and  I  believe  all  admit 
that  in  Enon  only  means  at  not  under  Enon. 

But  not  only  was  it  2. place  and  not  a  river, 
but  a  small  place  and  unimportant,  so  much 
so  that  the  sacred  writer  has  to  tell  us  that 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  3  I 

it  was  "near  to  Salim,"  lest  even  those  in  his 
day  might  not  know  where  it  was.  It  could 
not  have  been  the  quantity  of  the  water  as 
to  depth  that  called  him  there.  There  was 
little  depth  of  water  there,  only  a  few  inches 
at  the  deepest.  Perhaps  we  may  find  some 
hint  in  the  meaning  of  the  name. 

It  is  a  Hebrew  name,  and  I  looked  into 
my  Hebrew  lexicon.  It  is  an  abbreviated 
plural.  It  means  fjimtains.  I  looked  into 
my  Greek  Testament.  I  found  that  much 
water  was  in  the  Greek  udata  polla — many 
zuaters.  I  looked  into  my  geography  of  the 
country  and  I  found  it  described  as  a  place 
where  the  water  boiled  up  in  a  number  of 
places,  and  in  these  facts  I  found  the  secret 
why  John  preferred  the  springs  of  Enon  to 
the  river  water  of  Jordan  in  that  hot  climate. 
He  would  have  plenty  of  good  spring  water 
for  the  multitudes  who  thronged  him  to 
drink.  The  place  was  well  chosen  if  this 
was  John's  object,  but  there  was  not  depth 
of  water  enough  to  immerse  one  individual, 
much  less  thousands  daily. 

The  next  baptism  which  I  notice  is  that 


32  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

of  the  3,000  in  one  day  by  Peter  and  the 
apostles.  But  as  there  is  nothing  either  for 
or  against  immersion  in  this  place  except 
the  impossibility  of  immersing  so  mariy  in  so 
short  a  time,  and  as  I  have  stronger  passages 
I  pass  this  by. 

Paul's  baptism. 
Next  look  at  Paul's  baptism.  The  cir- 
cumstances are  briefly  these  :  He  was  on  a 
journey  when  the  Lord  appeared  to  him,  and 
the  vision  so  overcame  him  that  he  lost  his 
sight.  Three  days  he  was  without  sight  and 
neither  did  eat  or  drink.  Then  Ananias 
came  to  him  and  said,  "  Brother  Paul  receive 
thy  sight;"  and  after  telling  Paul  that  Jesus 
had  sent  him,  he  said  to  Paul,  "  Arise,  (or  as 
it  is  in  Greek,  **  standing  up,")  be  baptized," 
and  he  arose  (or  standing  up)  was  baptized. 
And  when  he  had  received  meat  he  was 
strengthened.  It  seems  impossible  to  be- 
lieve that  Paul  was  immersed.  There  is  no 
jdelay  in  finding  a  place  tp  immerse  him — no 
preparation— he  did  npt  even  stop  to  eat 
something,  though  he  had  eaten  nothing  for 
three   days — he    was   baptized  immediately 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  33 

and,  the   narrative    says    he    was   baptized 
standing. 

Have  I  mistaken  the  force  of  the  Greek 
work  "  anastas  ?"     Look  at  a  {q\n  passages  : 

Acts  i  :   15.     Peter  (anastas)  standing   up 
said. 

Acts  xiii :  i6.    Paul  (anastas)  standing  up, 
and  beckoning  with  the  hand  said. 

Acts  XV :  7.  Peter  (anastas)  standing  up 
said. 

Acts  xi  :  28.  Agabas  (anastas)  standing 
up  signfied. 

So  in  Acts  xxii :  i6.  "(Anastas)  standing 
up  be  baptized." 

Acts  ix  :  18.  And  (anastas)  standing  up  he 
was  baptized. 

Here  one  thing  deserves  special  notice. 
Anastas  is  the  Greek  participle.  It  expres- 
ses more  than  the  mere  act  of  rising.  It 
implies  a  continuance  of  the  standing.  The 
Greek  is  much  plainer  than  the  English.  It 
is  /.(u  wjaaza^  efiaTircad/j.  There  is  no  "and" 
between  the  participle  and  the  verb.  The 
literal  reading  is  "and  standing  up  he  was 
baptized."     The  narrative  puts  it  beyond  all 


34  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

controversy.  Paul  was  baptized  without 
leaving  the  house  and  was  standing,  therefore 
he  could  not  have  been  immersed.  He  was 
baptized  either  by  sprinkling  or  pouring. 

CORNELIUS'    BAPTISM. 

The  next  I  notice  is  Cornelius'  baptism. 
Peter  preached  to  him  and  those  assembled 
in  his  house,  and  seeing  the  spirit  poured 
out  upon  them  said  :  "  Can  any  man  forbid 
water  that  these  should  be  baptized  who 
have  received  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we  ?" 

Does  not  his  question  imply  that  the  wa- 
ter was  to  be  bj ought  ?  If  he  had  practiced 
immersion  would  he  not  have  asked,  Can  any 
man  forbid  that  we  should  go  down  to  the 
water  that  these  may  be  baptized  ? 

And  what  is  his  argument  or  feason  for 
baptizing  them  ?  *'The  Holy  Ghost  has  been 
poured  out  upon  these  Gentiles  as  well  as  on 
us  Jews.  Ought  we  not  to  pour  the  water  of 
baptism  upon  them  ?  Can  any  mafti  forbid 
it?" 

The  pouring  out  of  the  spirit  suggested 
baptism.  I  do  not  think  it  could  have  sug- 
gested immersion. 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  35 

BAPTISM  AT  THE    RED  SEA. 

Let  US  look  at  another  passage,  one  which 
1  have  already  touched,  and  one  place  where 
]  think  I  can  prove  that  baptism  was  by 
sprinkling,  2iX\^di  prove  it  from  scripture.  Moses 
and  the  Israelites  fled  from  Egypt.  The 
waters  of  the  Red  sea  opened  and  they  es- 
caped from  their  enemies  by  passing  through. 
Paul,  writing  to  the  Corinthians,  (see  1st 
Cor.  X  :  2,)  says  :  "  They  were  all  baptized 
unto  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea." 
What  was  the  mode  of  this  baptism  ?  Was 
this  an  iimnersion  ?  There  was  no  doubt  an 
immersion  there.  Pharoah  and  his  host  were 
immersed.  They  sank  like  lead  in  the  foam- 
ing waters.  But  this  was  not  the  mode  of 
the  Israelites'  baptism.  I  assert  that  they 
were  baptized  by  sprinkling,  and  from  the 
Bible  I  prove  it.  The  history  of  it  is  very 
plain.  The  sea  opened  and  the  Israelites 
entered  the  opening  and  passed  over  on  dry 
land.  The  cloud  which  before  had  been 
before  them  passed  ovzx  them  to  the  rear 
and  stood  between  them  and  the  Egyptians, 
and  as  it  passed  over,  the  Psalmist  says,  "  it 


36  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

poured  out  water."  This  was  undoubtedly 
the  baptism  unto  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in 
the  sea.  It  was  by  sprinkling,  for  there  was 
not  enough  to  wet  the  ground.  ''  They 
passed  through  on  dry  ground." 

BAPTISM    OF    THE    EUNUCH. 

We  next  approach  the  great  citadel  of  the 
immersionists.  Heretofore  we  have  only 
been  attacking  the  outposts.  The  baptism 
of  the  Eunuch  is  the  stronghold,  and  pro- 
bably considered  impregnable  by  many  who 
have  never  heard  but  one  side  of  this  matter. 

It  may,  perhaps,  startle  some  a  little  when 
I  assert  my  belief  that  this  is  one  of  the 
strongest  passages  in  favor  oi  sptinkling,  and 
that  Philip  taught  the  Eunuch  sprinkling  as 
the  true  mode  of  baptism,  and  that  he,  there- 
fore, baptized  him  by  going  down  out  of  the 
chariot  to  the  water,  and  that  there  he 
sprinkled  the  water  of  baptism  upon  him, 
and  that  they  then  both  came  up  from  the 
water  and  went  their  way.  This  I  believe, 
and  this  I  think  I  can  prove  from  scripture 
on  testimony  that  would  be  sufficient  on  any 
other  point.     Look  at  the  proof: 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  37 

The  Eunuch  was  riding  in  his  chariot  and 
reading  as  he  rode.  PhiHp,  being  sent  by 
God,  joined  him  and  rode  in  the  chariot  with 
him.  The  Eunuch,  interested  in  what  he 
read  from  one  of  the  prophets,  asked  PhiUp 
whether  the  prophet  spoke  of  himself  or 
some  other  man,  and  Phihp  began  at  the 
same  scripture  and  preached  unto  him  Jesus. 
He  expounded  the  prophecy  that  the  Eunuch 
was  reading. 

He  must  have  said  something  about  the 
duty  of  baptism,  for  as  they  unexpectedly 
came  to  some  water  the  sight  of  it  recalled 
what  he  had  been  taught,  and  he  said,  "  Sccf 
ivaterf  What  doth  hinder  that  I  should  be 
baptized?"  I  will  not  rest  my  argument 
upon  the  fact  that  between  Jerusalem  and 
Gaza,  where  they  were  journeying,  there  is 
not  any  large  stream  and  according  to  the 
best  evidence  only  one  in  the  whole  sixty 
miles,  and  that  rises  in  a  spring,  runs  a  little 
way  and  is  lost  in  the  sand.  Nor  will  I  rest 
it  upon  the  fact  that  nothing  is  said  of  chang- 
ing clothes,  and  the  improbability  that  Philip 
and  the  Eunuch  would  go  on  their  way  sat- 


38  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

urated,  as  they  must  have  been  if  immersion 
was  the  mode  of  baptism.  I  have  better 
ground  to  stand  upon,  because  there  is  httle 
or  no  conjecture  about  it. 

One  question  is,  why  PhiHp,  in  expound- 
ing a  passage  about  Jesus,  should  make  bap- 
tism so  prominent?  There  must  have  been 
something  in  the  prediction  which  alluded 
to  it.  Let  us  see  if  we  can  find  the  prophecy, 
and  what  part  of  it  suggested  baptism  to 
Philip.  Luke,  in  his  history  in  Acts,  does 
not  give  us  the  chapter  or  verse,  for  the  very 
good  reason  that  the  Bible  was  not  divided 
into  chapters  for  more  than  i  ,000  years  after 
the  Eunuch  read  from  the  prophets. 

The  ancients  could  not  refer  to  chapter 
and  verse.  Each  book  or  prophecy  was 
written  continuously,  and  the  only  way  they 
could  refer  to  any  part  was  by  referring  to 
the  subject  matter,  or  some  thing  that  was 
said  in  that  connection.  For  instance,  when 
our  Saviour  wished  to  refer  to  what  God 
said  when  He  appeared  to  Moses  in  the  burn- 
ing bush.  He  said :  "  Now  that  the  dead 
are  raised  even  Moses  showed  at  the  bushy' 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  39 

that  is,  it  is  taught  in  that  part  of  Moses' 
writing  where  the  burning  bush  is  mention- 
ed, and  anybody  famihar  with  the  scriptures 
could  find  it  by  that  reference.  So  when 
Luke  would  tell  us  the  part  that  the  Eunuch 
was  reading,  he  quotes  some  of^the  most 
striking  expressions  in  it,  and  by  these  we 
can  find  it. 

It  was  from  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  and 
that  particular  prediction  begins  with  the 
13th  verse  of  the  5  2d  chapter.  Nobody  will 
deny  that  that  beautiful  description  was 
spoken  concerning  Jesus  and  His  work.  It 
was. He  to  whom  the  prophet  referred  when 
he  said,**He  was  wounded  for  our  transgres- 
sion and  bruised  for  our  iniquities."  We 
have  too  often  quoted  and  read  the  passage 
to  believe  that  the  prophet  alludes  to  any- 
body else  when  he  says :  "  His  visage  was 
so  marred  more  than  any  man,  and  his  form 
more  than  the  sons  of  men,  and  so  shall  He 
sprinkle  many  nations."  There  is  where 
Philip  found  baptism  and  found  it  by  spjdnk- 
ling,  and  that  was  doubtless  the  mode  he 
taught   the  Eunuch,  and  hence  when    the 


40  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

chariot  stopped  and  he  and  the  Eunuch  both 
went  down  out  of  it  to  the  water,  he  took  up 
some  of  it  and  sprinkled  the  water  of  bap- 
tism upon  the  Eunuch,  then  they  both  came 
up  from  the  water  and  went  their  way. 

THE    RESTORED    JEW    MUST    BE  BAPTIZED   BY 
SPRINKLING. 

But  let  us  look  at  another  passage :  The 
Jewish  nation  is  now  cast  off  of  God.  The 
branches  of  the  Olive  tree  have  been  broken 
off  and  we  Gentiles  have  been  grafted  in. 
Prophecy  says  they  are  yet  to  return  and  be 
grafted  back  again  into  their  own  olive  tree. 
God,  through  the  mouth  of  Ezekiel  (xxxvi  : 
24,  25)  says  to  them,  "I  will  take  you  from 
among  the  heathen  and  gather  you  out  of 
all  countries,  and  will  bring  you  into  your 
own  land."  Who  can  doubt  that  this  is  the 
grafting  back  into  their  ozv7i  olive  tree  of 
which  the  apostle  speaks?  And  how  are 
they  to  be  grafted  back  ?  They  have  been 
cut  off  from  the  visible  Church  because  of 
their  unbelief.  Neither  the  Jews  of  our  day 
nor  their  children  belong  to  the  Church  of 
God.     When  brought  back  they  must  come 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  4I 

in  by  the  door.  Can  we  admit  them  by  the 
old  door,  their  old  rite  of  circumcision  ?  I 
think  our  immersing  brethren  would  say, 
''no !  we  cannot  admit  you  in  that  way ;  you 
must  be  baptized."  And  I  must  say  they 
are  right.  The  Jew  must  be  grafted  back 
again  into  his  own  olive  tree  by  baptism.  If 
he  apply  to  the  Baptist  church  our  brother 
of  that  church  must  immerse  him,  and  if  he 
apply  to  our  Church  I  will  not  receive  his 
circumcision,  for  by  his  unbelief  he  has  been 
cut  off  and  has  not  any  longer  any  rights  or 
privileges  in  the  church  of  God,  even  though 
the  apostle  does  call  it  the  Jew's  "  ozvii  olive 
trcey  No !  I  would  restore  him  to  the 
communion  .and  fellowship  of  the  Church 
"  built  upon  the  prophets  and  apostles,  of 
which  Jesus  Christ  is  the  chief  corner-stone;" 
I  would  bring  him  back  agairi  into  fellow- 
ship with  the  true  children  of  his  oivn  father 
Abraham,  by  baptizing  him  ;  and  the  mode 
of  baptism  by  which  I  would  admit  him,  and 
his  children  with  him,  would  be  by  sprink- 
ling, "clean  water"  upon  him  and  in  so  do- 
ing I  would  literally  fulfill  what  the  prophet 


42  SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM. 

Ezekiel,  nearly  2500  years  ago,  said  I  would 
do. 

Do  you  doubt  my  assertion?  Do  you 
think  that  I  have  misunderstood  scripture  ? 
Or  that  I  have  gone  beyond  the  record  ? 

Let  me  read  you  the  prediction,  and  judge 
for  yourself  whether  I  would  not  be  violating 
God's  word  if  I  should  restore  the  Jew  by 
immersion,  or  even  by  pouring  the  water  of 
baptism  upon  him.  The  prophecy  reads 
thus :  (Ez.  xxxvi :  24-26)  "For  I  will  take  you 
from  among  the  heathen  and  gather  you  out 
of  all  countries,  and  will  bring  you  into  your 
own  land.  Then  will  I  sprinkle  clean  water 
upon  you  and  you  shall  be  clean.  From  all 
your  filthiness  and  from  all  your  idols  will  I 
cleanse  you.  A  new  heart  also  will  I  give 
you  and  a  new  spirit  will  I  put  within  you, 
and  I  will  take  away  the  stony  heart  out  of 
your  flesh  and  I  will  give  you  a  heart  of 
flesh." 

If  Ezekiel  does  not  predict  that  the  Jew 
is  to  be  restored  to  the  church  by  baptism, 
and  that  that  baptism  is  to  be  by  sprinkling, 
I  cannot  understand  words. 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  43 

This  is  the  fourth  passage  which  clearly  says 
that  sprinkling  is  the  true  mode  of  baptism. 

BAPTIZED    INTO    CHRIST's    DEATH. 

But  some  one  will  say  the  scriptures  speak 
of  our  being  "buried  with  Him  by  baptism 
into  death  ;"  '*  so  many  of  us  as  were  baptized 
into  Jesus  Christ  were  baptized  into  His 
death."  Do  not  such  passage  teach  immer- 
sion? 

I  answer,  confidently,  not  at  all.  There 
is  no  mode  of  burying  which  resembles  im- 
mersion. 

Some  nations  bury  their  dead  by  burning 
them  ;  some  hang  parts  of  them  in  trees ; 
some  place  them  in  a  sitting  position ;  some 
place  them  in  artificial  caves  or  vaults  ;  some 
remove  the  earth,  lay  the  body  down,  and 
pour  or  sprinkle  the  earth  upon  it.  The  last 
two  are  Christian.  No  nation  takes  the  body 
and  pushes  it  down  under  the  ground,  either 
backward  or  forward. 

Our  form  of  burial  does  not  resemble  im- 
mersion. It  might  be  said  to  resemble 
sprinkling  or  pouring,  but  not  immersion,  as 
the  earth  is  poured  or  sprinkled  on  it. 


44  SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM. 

But  I  think  it  is  evident  from  the  context 
that  water  baptism  is  not  meant  here  in  any 
form.  Look  at  the  fruit  of  this  baptism  and 
see  what  baptism  is  alluded  to.  They  who 
are  dead  with  Christ  by  baptism  into  His 
death  are  "baptized  into  Jesus  Christ," 
"walk  in  newness  of  life,"  "they  have  the 
old  man  crucified,"  "  do  not  serve  sin,"  "  are 
dead  unto  sin,"  "alive  unto  God,"  "alive 
from  the  dead,"  "  they  obey  from  the  heart," 
"  are  made  free  from  sin,"  become  the  "  ser- 
vants of  righteousness,"  "  servants  of  God," 
"  risen  with  Him  through  faith  of  the  opera- 
tion of  God,"  and  "have  their  trespasses 
forgiven."  In  a  word  all  who  are  baptized 
with  this  baptism  are  true  Christians.  If 
water  baptism  regenerates  and  purifies  the 
subject,  then  water  baptism  is  meant:  but  if 
we  deny  baptismal  regeneration,  then  the 
baptism  with  God's  Holy  Spirit  must  be  al- 
luded to  here,  and  that  was  by  pouring.  God 
baptizes  us  \^y  pouring  out  His  Spirit  upon 
our  hearts,  therefore  we  are  made  "free 
from  sin,"  "  obey  from  the  heart,"  and  are 
"  become  the  servants  of  God," 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  45 

BAPTISM  MUST  BE  WITH    WATER. 

Look  at  one  argument  more.  John  says, 
"  I  baptize  zvith  water,  "  but  one  cometh  af- 
ter me,  etc.  He  shall  baptize  you  ivitJi  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  "Therefore  am 
I  come  baptizing  z<y/V/2  zuater.''*  "He  that 
sent  me  to  baptize  zuith  water."  This  form 
of  expression  is  always  used ;  it  is  always 
zuith  zuater  and  zuith  the  Holy  Spirit,  never 
iji  water.  Not  a  single  instance  can  I  find 
where  ifi  is  used  in  relation  to  water  baptism. 
Is  it  not  strange  if  in  water  is  the  only 
mode  ? 

Now  zuith  implies  the  instrument  and  al- 
ways means  that  that  instrument  is  applied 
to  the  subject. 

I  sweep  the  floor  with  the  broom.  I  chop 
the  wood  with  the  axe.  I  whip  the  horse 
with  the  switch.  I  beat  the  dog  with  the 
stick.  Do  I  apply  \\\^  floor  to  the  broom, 
or  the  zuood  to  the  axe,  or  the  dog  to  the 
stick  ? 

So  when  God  baptizes  men  with  His  Spirit 
He  applies  the  Spirit  to  men,  not  men  to  the 
Spirit,  and  I  cannot  resist  the  conclusion  that 


46  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

when  John  was  sent  to  baptize  with  water 
he  knew  that  his  commission  taught  him  to 
apply  the  zvater  to  the  subject,  not  the  sub- 
ject to  the  water. 

RELIGION  MUST  BE  UNIVERSAL. 

Look  again.  Rehgion  is  to  be  universal. 
It  is  as  much  the  duty  of  behevers  to  arise 
and  be  baptized  amid  the  polar  regions  and 
the  sands  of  Africa  as  in  our  well-watered 
land.  But  there  immersion  is  impossible. 
Therefore  immersion  is  not  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism instituted  by  Christ.  He  requires  no 
impossibilities. 

Thus  I  think  I  have  established,  on 
evidence  that  would  be  taken  by  any  un- 
prejudiced court,  three  of  the  points  I 
started  to  prove,  viz : 

1st.  That  the  word  baptizo  has  more 
than  one  meaning,  and  that  nothing 
can  be  determined  from  its  use  in  scrip- 
ture as  to  the  form  of  the  ordinance.  In 
no  instance  does  it  mean  immerse,  but 
in  several  instances  it  means  to  sprinkle, 
and  that  the  expressions  "  in,"  '*  into/' 
and  "  out  of,"  come  from  words,  which  in  two 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  4/ 

instances  out  of  three,  and  five  instances  out 
of  six,  mean  "to  and  from."  Therefore  they 
prove  nothing  with  certainty. 

2d.  That  the  design  of  the  ordinance 
points  to  sprinkHng  as  the  proper  mode : 
That  John's  commission  to  baptize  with  wa- 
ter and  not  in  water,  and  the  fact  that  all 
baptisms  are  said  to  be  ivith  and  never  in, 
point  to  sprinkUng  or  pouring  as  the  true 
scriptural  mode  of  baptism. 

3d.  I  have  proved  from  the  circumstances 
recorded  that,  in  every  instance  where  the 
form  of  baptism  is  alluded  to,  sprinkling  was 
the  mode,  and  in  the  other  instances  there 
is  nothing  which,  rightly  understood,  points 
to  anything  else.     Look  at  the  evidence. 

I  have  proved  from  the  Old  Testament, 
and  from  Paul's  own  words  in  Hebrews,  that 
he  thought  baptism  meant  sprinkling. 

I  have  proved  from  the  design  of  baptism 
that  it  means  sprinkling. 

I  have  proved  that  our  Saviour  was  bap- 
tized by  sprinkling, 

I  have  proved  from  the  greatness  of  the 
multitude   baptized   by   John,    and  by  the 


48  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

apostles  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  that  the 
mode  was  by  spjinkling. 

I  have  proved  that  Paul  was  baptized  by 
sprinkling. 

I  have  proved  that  it  is  at  least  most  prob- 
able that  Cornelius  and  those  with  him  were 
baptized  by  spri7ikling. 

I  have  proved  that  the  Israelites  were  bap- 
tized to  Moses  by  sprinkling. 

I  have  proved  that  the  Eunuch  was  bap- 
tized by  sprinkling. 

I  have  proved  that  the  Jew,  when  restor- 
ed, is  to  be  restored  by  sprinkling. 

INFANT  BAPTISM. 

But  the  evidence  for  x^y  fourth  position, 
which  relates  to  the  right  and  duty  to  bring 
our  children  and  consecrate  them,  with  our- 
selves to  God  in  baptism,  is  even  stronger 
than  what  has  gone  before. 

This  point  can  be  clearly  demonstrated. 
The  mode  of  baptism,  as  there  is  no  definite 
form  laid  down  by  Christ  or  His  apostles, 
must  be  learned  by  inference  and  by  reason- 
ing. 

But  infant  baptism  rests  upon  a  different 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  49 

foundation.  The  chain  of  evidence  in  its 
faroj  is  so  strong  and  so  complete  that  we 
are  forced  either  to  admit  it  or  fly  in  the  face 
of  all  the  rules  of  argument  adopted  among 
men. 

But  permit  me  to  lay  down  the  argument 
and  the  conclusion,  and  then  be  my  judges 
whether  I  establish  my  positions  clearly  or 
not. 

My  first  position  is,  that  there  has  been 
but  one  church  established  by  God  upon 
earth,  or  that  the  Jeivish  and  Christian 
church  is  the  same  church  under  different 
forms. 

2d.  In  that  church,  as  organized  by  God, 
the  children  were  admitted  and  parents  corn- 
manded  under  a  penalty  to  bring  them. 

3d.  That  command  has  never  been  revok- 
ed, and  it  follows,  as  a  matter  of  course,  that 
they  are  members  still,  and  that  any  parents 
who  refuse  to  bring  their  children  into  cove- 
nant with  God  neglect  their  duty. 

But  assertions  are  not  arguments.  Let 
us  then  come  to  the  law  and  testimony. 


50  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

ONLY  ONE  CHURCH  OF  GOD. 

1st.  The  identity  of  the  Church  under  the 
two  dispensations  is  clearly  taught  in  my 
text,  and  in  a  multitude  of  other  places  in 
the  word  of  God. 

"  For  as  many  of  you  as  have  been  bap- 
tized into  Christ  have  put  on  Christ.  For 
there  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  there  is  neith- 
er bond  nor  free,  there  is  neither  male  nor 
female,  for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus,  and 
if  ye  be  Christ's  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed 
and  heirs  according  to  the  promise." 

Paul  was  writing  the  Gentile  converts  of 
Galatia  who  had  been  received  by  baptism 
into  the  visible  church  of  Christ. 

All  these  first  churches  were  peculiarly 
situated.  Before  the  coming  of  Christ  noth- 
ing but  Judaism  was  authorized  by  God,  and 
its  rites  and  ceremonies  were  the  only  true 
religion.  To  the  Jew  belonged  the  promises, 
and  Jerusalem  was  the  place  and  the  temple 
service  was  the  way  in  which  God  was  to  be 
sought  and  found. 

At  length  Christ  came  and  the  shadows 
had  accomplished  their  mission.    But  though 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  5  I 

their  typical  importance  was  at  an  end  they 
did  not  lose  their  hold  upon  the  affections 
of  the  people.  It  >vas  very  hard  for  the  j  ew 
to  give  them  up.  Hence  many  ignorant 
teachers  sprang  up  among  them,  who  taught 
the  multitude  that  they  must  still  observe 
these  things. 

This  was  the  trouble  with  the  Galatlan 
converts.  False  teachers  taught  them  that 
they  must  be  circumcised.  How  easily  they 
could  work  upon  the  fears  of  these  Gentile 
converts.  They  would  say :  "  The  only 
way  of  admission  into  the  church  has  been 
by  circumcision.  If  then  ye  would  be  the 
seed  of  Abraham  you  must  observe  this 
rite."  In  this  epistle,  and  especially  in  the 
text,  Paul  overthrows  such  reasoning.  They 
are  not  to  look  to  the  forms  of  the  ceremo- 
nial law.  Faith  in  Christ's  blood  was  their 
only  hope  ;  and  lest  any  might  fear  that  they 
were  not  as  sure  of  salvation  as  the  believ- 
ing Jew,  he  tells  them  that  the  Church  is  the 
same ;  that  all  tliat  have  been  baptized  have 
put  on  Christ,  are  in  the  true  Church,  the 
true  Spiritual  seed   of  Abraham,  of  which 


5  2  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

Christ  is  head.  "  Ye  are  the  children  of  God 
by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus.  For  as  many  of 
you  as  have  been  baptized  into  Christ  have 
put  on  Christ. — There  is  neither  Jew  nor 
Greek,  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free,  there 
is  neither  male  nor  female,  for  ye  are  all  one 
in  Christ  Jesus,  and  if  ye,  be  CJirist's  then  are 
ye  Abraham's  seed  and  heirs  according  to 
the  promise." 

The  apostle,  therefore,  teaches  this  truth: 
That  the  Church  to  which  faith  unites  these 
Gentile  converts,  into  the  true  membership 
of  which  they  have  been  brought  by  the  bap- 
tism of  the  Spirit  and  into  whose  commu- 
nion they  are  admitted  by  baptism  with  wa- 
ter, was  the  same  Church  as  that  to  which 
the  circumcised  seed  of  Abraham  belonged, 
and  that  all  in  it  were  alike  heirs  according 
to  the  promise.  The  duty  of  believing  par- 
ents to  bring  their  children  and  consecrate 
them  to  God  by  baptism  is  fully  established 
by  this  truth.  Let  us  see  whether  we  have 
any  ground  from  other  parts  of  the  sacred 
volume  to  believe  that  the  Old  and  New 
Testament  Church  is  the  same. 


feCRiPTURE    BAPTISM.  ^3 

THE  JEWISH  CHURCH  NOT  COMPLETE. 

It  is  evident  from  the  whole  history  and 
design  of  the  Old  Testament  dispensation 
that  it  was  not  intended  to  be  a  Church 
complete  in  itself.  It  was  instituted  as  a 
type  of  better  things  to  come. 

By  itself  it  was  an  unmeaning-  form.  What 
were  the  sacrifices  or  the  feasts  and  the  festi- 
vals, nay,  what  the  temple  itself,  with  its 
high  priest,  and  priests,  and  Levites,  and 
victims,  if  not  typical  of  something  yet  to 
come  ?  The  evident  necessity  that  some- 
thing must  come  after  to  which  they  point- 
ed, proves  that  that  dispensation  was  not 
perfect  in  itself  It  was  only  the  dawn  of 
the  day  of  which  Christ's  coming  was  the 
noon. 

2d.  The  covenant  made  with  Abraham 
shows  that  the  Jewish  dispensation  was  not 
intended  to  be  a  Church  complete  in  itself 

The  promise  was  made,  that  others  beside 
the  Jewish  nation  were  to  reap  the  benefits. 
"'  In  thee  shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth 
be  blessed."  "  I  will  make  thee  a  father  of 
many  nations." 

3d.  That  the  Church  is  the  same  is  evident 


54  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

from  the  fact  that  nothing  has  been  changed 
but  those  things  which  were  from  their  very 
nature  changeable. 

The  head  of  the  Church  is  not  changed. 
It  is  the  same  "  God  over  all  and  blessed  for 
ever  more." 

The  Purifier  is  not  changed.  The  same 
spirit  regenerates. 

The  Redeemer  is  not  changed.  The  same 
Savior  that  was  wounded  for  Isaiah's 
transgressions  is  ^2/r  Savior. 

The  Law  is  not  changed.  The  same  two 
tables,  whose  sum  is  perfect  love  to  God  and 
man,  are  still  binding. 

Repentance  for  sin,  and  faith  in  an  aton- 
ing substitute,  and  love  to  Him  by  whose 
stripes  we  are  healed,  and  that  true  obedience y 
which  is  the  offspring  of  love,  have  not 
changed.  Nor  has  the  true  worship  of  God 
changed.  We  mu^)t  still  worship  in  spirit 
and  in  truth. 

Nor  have  even  the  two  sacraments  chang- 
ed except  in  their  external  form.  We  have 
already  seen  that  their  meaning  is  the  same; 
that  the  supper  is  the  same  as  the  passover 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  55 

in  meaning,  and  that  baptism  is  the  same  as 
circumcisfon  in  meaning.  Where  is  the 
difference?  First,  the  typical  ceremonies 
are  laid  aside  because  they  have  done  all 
they  were  designed  to  do — pointed  to  Christ 
until  Christ  came ;  and  secondly,  the  door 
has  been  opened  wider  so  that  the  Gentiles 
might  come  in. 

BIBLE  TESTIMONY. 

But  look  at  the  scriptural  testimony  to  the 
identity  of  the  Church.  The  Bible  declares 
it  to  be  the  same. 

Besides  the  fact  that  the  covenant  made 
with  Abraham  was  to  embrace  all  nations ; 
besides  the  fact  that  all  the  faithful  are  call- 
ed the  seed  of  Abraham,  it  is  taught  in  many 
ways  so  plainly  that  it  seems  hard  for  any 
to  mistake  who  will  give  it  their  candid  at- 
tention. 

Christ  said  He  came  not  to  destroy  the  law 
and  the  prophets  but  to  fulfill.  He  said  this 
to  the  Jews,  who  feared  that  He  was  destroy- 
ing the  church  they  loved,  and  if  He  did  de- 
stroy it  and  on  its  ruins  build  another 
church,  what    could  His  words  mean?     If 


56  SCRIPTURE  BAPTISM. 

the  church  was  overthrown  and  a  new  one 
set  up,  then  both  the  law  and  the  prophets 
were  destroyed.  But  other  parts  of  scrip- 
ture tell  us  plainly  that  He  fulfilled  the  law 
and  prophets  in  all  their  predictions  and  re- 
quirements, and  types  and  shadows.  And 
lest  any  might  think  that  He  was  establishing 
anntlier  church,  He  plainly  said  that  there 
was  to  be  "but  one  fold,  even  as  there  was 
but  one  shepherd."  And  so  also  in  the  text, 
"there  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  there  is 
neither  bond  nor  free,  there  is  neither  male 
nor  female,  for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus." 
In  Hebrews,  also,  the  apostle  dwelling 
upon  the  faith  of  the  patriarchs,  says:  "They 
received  not  the  promises,  God  having  pro- 
vided some  better  thing  for  us,  that  they 
without  us  should  not  be  made  perfect." 
Surely  he  does  teach  that  the  gospel  Church 
is  but  the  completion  of  the  Jewish  Church. 
They  did  not  receive  the  promise.  It  was 
not  completely  fulfilled  in  them,  but  it  was 
to  find  its  completion  when  in  accordance 
with  the  prediction  of  Isaiah,  "the  mountain 
of  the  Lord's  house  shall  be    established  in 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  ^^ 

the  top  of  the  mountain,  and  shall  be  exal- 
ted above  the  hills,  and  all  nations  shall  flow 
unto  it."  Was  the  promise  fulfilled  in  them  ? 
No.  Is  it  completely  fulfilled  in  us  ?  No. 
When  will  it  be  fulfilled  ?  When  under  the 
beams  of  the  latter  day  glory  "many  people 
shall  go  and  say :  Come  ye  and  let  us  go 
up  to  the  mountain  of  the  Lord,  and  to  the 
house  of  the  God  of  Jacob,  and  He  will  teach 
us  His  ways  and  we  will  walk  in  His  paths." 

It  will  be  fulfilled  when  ''every  valley 
shall  be  exalted,  and  every  mountain  and 
hill  shall  be  made  low  and  the  rough  places 
plain,  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  shall  be 
revealed,  and  all  flesh  shall  see  it  together.' 

It  will  be  fulfilled  when  **Zion  shall  arise 
and  shine  because  the  glory  of  the  Lord  is 
risen  upon  her.  When  the  Gentiles  shall 
come  to  her  light  and  kings  to  the  bright- 
ness of  her  rising."  Then  will  the  Church 
to  which  Isaiah  belonged  become  perfect 
and  receive  the  complete  fulfillment  of  the 
promise  made  to  Abraham  :  "  In  thee  shall 
all  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed." 

And  this  conviction  that  the  Church  is  the 


58  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

same  only  becomes  the  stronger  when  we 
remember  for  what  these  glorious  predic- 
tions were  given.  They  were  given  to  com- 
fort and  strengthen  God's  ancient  people. 

The  prophet  saw  the  Church  that  he  loved 
in  a  languishing  condition.  Ungodliness 
was  triumphing  over  her,  but  "by  the  eye 
of  faith  and  spirit  of  prophecy"  he  saw  the 
same  Church  revive  and  shine,  and  spread 
throughout  the  whole  earth.  Jerusalem  was 
then  in  affliction,  but  with  prophetic  eye  he 
saw  her  wave  her  banner  from  the  top  of 
the  highest  mountain.  He  saw  all  nations 
flowing  like  water  toward  Zion,  the  Zion 
that  he  loved.  Under  her  hallowing  influ- 
ences he  saw  all  nations  converting  their 
spears  into  pruning  hooks  and  their  swords 
into  plowshares ;  and  it  was  in  view  of 
these  animating  visions,  that,  even  in  the 
midst  of  the  desolation  of  Zion,  he  took  his 
harp  from  the  willows  and  tuned  it  to  these 
exulting  strains. 

But  2/the  Church  is  different,  //"the  Zion 
that  noiv  is  is  not  the  Zion  to  which  the 
prophet  belonged,  then  he  rejoiced  too  soon. 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  59 

It  was  not  his  Zion  that  was  to  be  thus  ex- 
alted. Who  iL'ill,  who  CAN  beheve  it  ?  Not 
I.  The  same  Zion  concerning  which  Isaiah 
uttered  these  glorious  predictions  is  the  Zion 
that  is  now  flourishing.  Let  those  who  will, 
unchurch  these  old  patriarchs  and  prophets. 
Let  them  declare  that  the  sweet  singer  of 
Israel  was  not  one  of  them.  That  he,  to 
whom  God  gave  the  two  tables  of  the  law, 
was  not  one  of  them  ;  that  the  sublime  Isaiah 
was  not  one  of  them;  that  the  weeping 
Jeremiah  was  not  one  of  them  ;  but  it  will 
ever  be  my  pride  and  delight  to  belong  to 
the  Church  which  claims  among  its  members 
Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  Samuel, 
•and  David,  and  the  prophets,  and  all  those 
bright  examples  of  faith  and  good  works 
who  lived  when  the  Church  was  yet  'in  her 
infancy.  It  will  ever  be  my  pride  to  belong 
to  the  Church  built  upon  the  prophets  as 
well  as  apostles,  Jesus  Christ  himself  being 
the  chief  corner  stone,  for  such  a  Church  is 
the  New  Testament  Church.  It  does  not 
supersede  the  Old.  This  the  Savior  ex- 
pressly declares  when  He  tells  the  Jews  that 


60  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

the  kingdom  of  heaven,  meaning  the  Church, 
should  be  taken  away  from  the  Jews  and 
given  to  the  Gentiles.  Surely  the  Church 
given  to  us  Gentiles  is  the  same  Church 
which  was  taken  from  the  Jews. 

But  the  a;^ostle  puts  it  beyond  any  possi- 
bility of  mistake.  He  says  that  we  Gentiles 
are  cut  out  of  a  wild  olive  tree  and  grafted 
into  the  good  olive  tree.  By  the  good  olive 
tree  he  undoubtedly  means  the  Jewish 
Church.  By  nature  we  belong  to  the  wild 
oli\  c  tree,  but  by  faith  we  become  *'the  seed 
of  Abraham,"  and  are  grafted  into  this  "good 
olive  tree."  What  can  it  mean  unless  it  is 
designed  to  teach  that  the  tree  remains  the 
same ;  that  the  old  Church  is  not  destroyed, 
but  we  are  joined  to  it  and  made  heirs  of  its 
promises?  The  grafting  on  of  the  Gentile 
branch  has  not  destroyed  the  tree.  Nay,  it 
is  still  the  Jew's  olive  tree  and  says  Paul,  if 
he  continue  not  in  his  unbelief,  he  shall  be 
'•grafted  back  again  on  to  his  own  olive  tree." 
Can  Paul  have  thought  that  the  Jewish  and 
Christian  churches  were  different  ?     That  the 


SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM.  6 1 

Jewish  church  was  rooted  up  and  the  Chris- 
tian planted  in  its  stead  ? 

He  asserts  just  the  reverse.  He  knew 
the  Church  to  be  the  same,  and  his  whole 
argument  is  based  upon  the  fact  that  it  is 
the  same ;  and  in  that  illustration  of  the 
ohve  tree  he  is  only  teaching  what  he  teaches 
in  my  text:  "If  we  are  Christ's  we  are 
Abraham's  seed  and  heirs  according  to  the 
promise." 

I  have  dwelt  the  longer  upon  this  identity 
of  the  Church  under  both  dispensations,  be- 
cause it  demonstrates  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
all  believers  to  bring  their  children  into 
covenant  relation  with  God.  If  we  are  in- 
deed Abraham's  seed  then  it  is  our  duty  to 
do  what  God  commanded  Abraham  to  do — 
consecrate  our  children  to  God, 

If  the  Christian  church  is  essentially  the 
same  as  the  Jewish  cJinrch  then  the  duties  en- 
joined and  the  /;  ivileges  enjoyed  in  the  one 
will  still  belong  to  the  members  of  the  other 
unless  formally  repealed. 

This  my  text  asserts  as  the  apostle's  con- 
clusion  of  the   whole    matter.     If  we   are 


62  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

Abraham's  seed  we  are  heirs  according  to 

THE  PROMISE. 

In  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham,  God 
gave  him  a  gracious  promise  :  "  I  will  be 
a  God  to  thee  and  to  thy  seed  after  thee." 

Among  the  Jews  this  was  called,  by  way 
of  distinction,  "  the  promise y  and  when  Paul 
says  we  are  heirs  according  to  the  promise, 
he  teaches  that  the  promise  belongs  to  us 
which  was  given  to  Abraham,  "  I  will  be  a 
God  to  thee  and  to  thy  seed  after  th*",e." 

He  tells  us  the  same  thing  in  Romans, 
where  he  says  "  the  promise  was  not  to 
Abraham  or  his  seed  through  the  law,  but 
through  the  righteousness  of  faith.  And  it 
is  of  faith  that  it  might  be  by  grace  to  the 
end  that  the  promise  might  be  sure  to  all 
the  seed,  and  not  to  that  only  which  is  of 
the  law,  (that  is  the  natural  posterity,  the 
Jew,)  but  to  that  also  which  is  of  the  faith 
of  Abraham." 

What  can  the  apostle  mean  if  he  does  not 
teach  that  the  promise  given  to  Abraham 
belongs  to  all  of  us,  who  by  true  faith  be- 
come the  true  seed  of  Abraham  ? 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  63 

SEAL    OF    THE    PROMISE. 

The  seal  of  this  promise  under  the  Old 
Testament  was  circiwicision.  The  seal  un- 
der the  New  is  baptism,  and  as  the  first  was 
to  be  applied  to  the  children  of  all  the  seed, 
so  the  second  is  to  be  applied  to  the  children 
of  all  the  seed,  unless  there  is  some  com- 
mand formally  repealing  the  duty.  Has  such 
a  command  been  given  ?  Or  is  there  the  least 
intimation  that  the  duty  has  been  revoked  ? 
Nobody  has  been  able  to  find  the  command. 
Nobody  has  been  able  to  find  the  least  inti- 
mation that  the  duty  has  been  revoked  ? 

Nay;  instead  of  being  revoked,  we  find  it 
re-enacted  in  more  places  than  one. 

INFANT     MEMBERSHIP    RE-ENACTED  BY  CHRIST. 

When  the  parents  brought  their  children 
to  the  Savior,  and  the  disciples,  who  seem 
to  have  doubted  the  right  of  infant  member- 
ship were  about  to  forbid  them,  what  did 
our  Savior  say?  Did  He  say  the  children 
were  embraced  under  the  old  covenant,  but 
not  under  the  new?  Nay  ;  but  just  the  re- 
verse. He  rebuked  His  disciples.  He  was 
much  displeased,  (Mark  x:    14,)  and  said: 


64  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

"Suffer  the  little  children  to  come  unto  me 
and  forbid  them  not,  for  of  such  is  the  King- 
dom of  God." 

PETER  so  TEACHES. 

When  the  Savior  had  ascended  up  and 
sent  forth  the  Spirit  to  qualify  His  apostles 
for  their  work,  and  they  began  their  public 
teaching  with  that  powerful  discourse  by 
which  so  large  a  multitude  were  converted, 
was  there  any  intimation  in  that  first  sermon 
that  the  duty  had  been  repealed  ?  Nay  ; 
just  the  reverse.  Listen  to  Peter  :  **  Re- 
pent and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission 
of  sins,  and  you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  For  the  promise  is  to  you  and 
your  children,  and  to  all  who  are  afar  off, 
even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall 
call." 

As  soon  as  he  tells  them  of  their  duty  to 
be  baptized,  he  tells  them  of  their  duty  to 
bring  their  children  also,  quoting  that  pro- 
mise with  which  every  Jew  was  familiar,  and, 
lest  they  might  think  that  it  was  only  for 
them  and  their  children,  he  adds,  that  it  is 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  6$ 

"to  all  who  are  afar  off,  (us  Gentiles,)   even 
as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call." 

The  Savior  was  once  displeased  with  His 
disciples  (and  Peter  was  probably  with  them) 
for  trying  to  keep  the  little  children  back ; 
and  when,  after  His  resurrection,  He  gave 
his  parting  command  to  Peter  to  feed  His. 
sheep,  He  commanded  Him  also  to  feed  t/ie 
lambs ;  and  Peter  did  not  forget  it;  but  in 
his  first  se»mon  includes  both,  and  in  effect 
says  to  each  one  that  was  touched  by  his 
powerful  discourse,  *'  come  thou  and  all  thy 
house  into  the  ark." 

PAUL  TEACHES  IT. 

When  Paul  wrote  his  epistles  of  instruc- 
tion to  the  churches,  did  he  revoke  the  com- 
mand to  bring  the  children  ?  Nay  ;  but  in 
several  of  the  epistles  he  repeats  it,  as  we 
have  already  seen. 

THE  APOSTLES    PRACTICED  IT. 

In  the  practice  of  the  apostles  was  there 
anything  that  looked  like  a  revoking  of  the 
duty  ?  Nay ;  but  the  contrary,  for  they  bap- 
tized households — the  household  of  Step- 
hanas^ the  jailer  and  his  house,   Lydia  and 


66  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

her  house.     I  can  take  time  only  to   dwell 
upon  one  of  these. 

Take  the  case  of  Lydia  and  her  house,  as 
we  find  it  in  Acts  i6:  14.  She  is  the  only 
person  mentioned  in  the  narrative,  except 
at  the  time  of  baptism.  She  was  a  seller  of 
purple;  slic  worshiped  God;  she  heard  the 
apostles ;  the  Lord  opened  lier  heart ;  she 
attended  to  the  things  spoken  of  Paul ;  she 
besought  the  apostles  if  they  h^d  judged 
her  faithful  to  come  into  /z^r  house  and  abide 
there,  and  she  constrained  them. 

Nothing  is  said  of  any  other  person,  ex- 
cept where  her  baptism  is  mentioned,  and 
then  it  is  said,  **  when  sJie  was  baptized,  and 
her  household,  she  besought  the  apostles,  if 
they  had  judged  her  faithful  to  the  Lord,  to 
come  into  her  house." 

If  her  children  hadbeen  adults  and  had  been 
baptized  on  their  own  faith,  as  our  immersing 
brethren  try  to  think,  surely  they  would  have 
been  mentioned  in  some  part  of  the  narra- 
tive. Lydia  would  at  least  have  said,  ''  if  ye 
have  judged  tis  faithful,"  but  she  said  '*me" 
plainly  teaching  that  she  alone  had  believed, 


SCRIPTURr:   BAPTISM.  6/ 

The  Greek  word  used  f(;r  her  household 
deservx's  a  passing  notice.  It  is  or/oc,  and 
means  the  cJiildren  of  the  family  in  distinc- 
tion from  the  servants.  When  others  than 
children  are  included  or/du.  is  used.  When 
the  children  are  meant,  it  is  the  "or/.o-^''  as 
the  house  of  God,  or  the  house  of  Jacob,  or 
the  house  of  Israel,  or  the  house  of  Judah. 
When  Peter  is  said  to  dwell  with  Simon,  or/.ca 
is  used  because  Peter  was  not  a  child  of  his. 
When  our  Saviour  speaks  of  the  servants 
not  abiding  in  the  house  or  household 
he  uses  or/ca.  When  some  of  Caesar's  house- 
hold are  said  to  have  believed  ocxk/.,  is  used, 
for  none  of  Caesar's   children  are  meant. 

To  the  jailer  it  was  promised,"believe  on 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  thou  shalt  be  sav- 
ed and  thy  house  [or/nz),  and  the  same  hour 
of  the  night  he  washed  the  stripes  of  Paul 
and  Silas  and  was  baptized  he  and  all  his 
straightway."  Soof  Lydia,  it  is  said  she  was 
baptized  and  her  household  {or/.n-.)  Surely 
infant  baptism  is  not  forbidden  by  Christ  or 
by  the  apostles,  but  rather  established  and 
confirmed    both    by  precept   and   example. 


6^  SCRIPTURE  BAp-riSM. 

FAITH  NOT  REQUIRED  OF  INFANTS. 

But  says  one/*  do  not  the  scriptures  invaria- 
bly teach  that  baptism  is  to  be  administered  to 
those  only  who  believe?  Why  then  should  it 
be  administered  to  one  not  capable  of  exer- 
cising faith  ?"  I  will  answer  this  question  by 
asking  another.  Do  not  the  scriptures  invari- 
ably teach  that  heaven  is  to  be  given  only  to 
those  who  repent  and  believe?  How  then 
can  heaven  be  given  to  any  not  capable 
of  exercising  faith  ?  The  demand  for  repent- 
ance and  faith  in  the  subjects  of  baptism  is 
not  near  so  positive  as  is  the  demand  for  re- 
pentance and  faith  in  those  who  would  enter 
heaven.  No  passage  says  no7ie  may  be  bap- 
tized but  those  who  repent  and  believe,  but 
it  does  say  in  many  places  that  none  shall 
enter  heaven  but  those  who  repent  and  be^- 
lieve.  If  on  this  ground  you  prove  that  none 
of  our  children  are  fit  subjects  for  baptism, 
on  the  same  ground,  only  more  clearly,  I  will 
prove  that  not  one  of  our  dear  little  ones,  who 
have  gone  before  us,  can  ever  enter  heaven. 
If  the  scriptures  exclude  them  from  baptism 
because  they  cannot  repent  and  believe,  then 


SCRlPrURK   BAPTISM.  69 

there  is  no  hope  that  any  of  them  can  be 
saved. 

Away,  my  brethren,  with  such  horrible  logic 
as  this.  The  Bible  does  not  speak  to  babes 
and  sucklings  when  it  says  repent,  believe  or 
be  lost.  Nor  does  it  apply  to  babes  and 
sucklings  when  it  says  repent  and  believe 
and  be  baptized.  Both  classes  of  texts  mean 
adults,  and  to  adults  our  Church  applies  them 
both.  We  do  not  believe  that  adults  can  get 
to  heaven  except  they  repent  and  believe,  and 
we  do  not  think  them  fit  subjects  for  baptism 
unless  they  repent  and  believe,  and  we  are 
very  careful  to  examine  them  as  to  these 
graces  before  we  baptize  them,  more  careful 
I  believe,  than  any  other  denomination.  But 
we  do  not  believe  that  either  faith  or  re- 
pentance  is  necessary  in  infants  that 
they  may  enter  the  church  above,  and  there- 
fore we  do  not  require  these  graces,  in  order 
that  those  descending  from  believing  parents 
may  be  recognized  as  members  of  the 
church  below. 

Faith   was  required   of  all  adult  Gentiles 
who  professed  Judaism  before  they  were  ad- 


70  Scripture  baptism. 

mitted  Into  the  church,  but  it  was  not  required 
of  the  children  of  such  parents.  So  now 
we  require  it  of  the  parents  but  not  of  the 
children.  True,  we  open  the  door  a  little 
wider  now  than  then.  Under  the  old  econ- 
omy both  parents  must  belong  to  the  house- 
hold of  faith.  A  Jew  with  a  Gentile  wife,  or 
a  Jewess  with  a  Gentile  husband,  could  not 
bring  their  children  into  covenant ;  but  un- 
der the  gospel,  we  permit  the  children  of 
only  one  believing  parent  to  be  brought.  We 
open  the  door  a  little  wider  because  the 
apostles  so  taught  us.  Paul  says  the  unbe- 
lieving husband  or  wife  is  sanctified  by  the 
believing  wife  or  husband,  so  that  the  chil- 
dren are  not  tmclean,  {i.  e.,  not  unfit  to  be 
brought  to  God),  "  but  now,"  he  says  "are 
they  holy,"  i.  e.,fit  to  be  brought  and  offered 
to  God  under  this  covenant. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THE  FATHERS. 

Nor  does  our  evidence  stop  with  the  New 
Testament  times.  The  practice  of  the 
Church  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  con- 
firms me  in  my  opinion. 


SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM.  7I 

I  have  only  time  to  allude  to  a  few  facts 
from  the  history  of  the  Church. 

The  first  I  mention  is  the  testimony  of 
Ireneus  who  was  born  in  the  year  97.  He 
says  "  infants,  little  ones,  children,  youth 
and  persons  of  mature  age,  were  reborn  to 
God  ;  that  is,  set  apart  to  His  service  by  bap- 
tism." He  argues  the  propriety  of  it  from 
the  fact  that  Christ  came  to  save  "infants, 
little  ones,  &c.,"  and  declares  positively  that 
"the  church  learned  from  the  apostles  to 
baptize  infants."  * 

TertuUian  was  born  in  the  year  147 — He 
says  "  that  our  Savior  comviandcd  little 
children  to  be  baptized" — that  "  if  either 
parent  were  a  Christian,  the  children  were 
enrolled  in  Jesus  Christ  by  baptism." 

Origen  was  a  Presbyter  of  Alexandria, 
the  son  of  a  Christian  martyr,  and  was  born 
about  the  year  175.  He  declares  that  "the 
Church  received  the  injunction  from  the 
apostles   to   give   baptism  to  infants" — that 


*  For  these  quotations  from  the  fathers,  see  BibJe  Bap- 
tism, pp.  325-327. 


72  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

*'the  custom  of  baptizing  infants  was  re* 
ceived  from  Christ  and  His  apostles." 

In  the  year  253  a  council  of  sixty-six 
ministers  was  held  at  Carthage.  The  ques- 
tion arose  whether  infants  might  or  might 
not  be  baptized  before  the  eighth  day  after 
birth  and  it  was  unanimously  decided  that 
they  might  be  baptized  before  the  eighth  day. 

Augustine  was  born  about  the  year  330. 
He  says  that  infant  baptism  was  not  insti- 
tuted by  councils  but  was  always  in  use,  and 
says  "the  custom  of  the  Church  in  baptizing 
infants  must  not  be  disregarded." 

Pelagius  was  a  learned  man  who  wrote 
about  the  year  410.  He  was  very  erroneous 
in  many  of  his  doctrinal  views.  Some  said 
that  his  doctrines  militated  against  infant 
baptism.  In  reply  he  said,  '*men  slander 
me  as  if  I  denied  the  sacrament  of  baptism 
to  infants,  which  is  a  thing  I  never  heard : 
no  !  not  even  any  wicked  heretic  say." 

"Ireneus,  about  the  year  176  wrote  an  ac- 
count of  all  the  professedly  Christian  sects 
that  had  sprung  up  between  the  death  of 
Christ  and  his  own  time.     Epiphanius   who 


SCRtPTURt:   tJAPTiSM.  ;^3 

wrote  about  the  year  370  describes  80  sects 
of  professing  Christians.  Augustine,  about 
the  year  400,  mentions  88  sects  and  Philos- 
trius,  shortly  after  this  enumerates  100  dif- 
ferent sects.  But  in  neither  of  these  cata- 
logues, is  there  to  be  found  the  least  intima- 
tion of  any,  (except  such  as  denied  water 
baptism  altogether,)  who  did  not  hold  to 
the  baptism  of  infants  as  a  Divine  institu- 
tion."* 

About  the  year  1 1 10  a  small  sect  among 
the  Waldenses  called  Petrobrussians,  who 
imagined  "that  infants  could  not  be  saved,'" 
denied  to  infants  baptism.  They  only  con- 
tinued about  forty  years,  and  for  350  years 
more,  no  writer  opposed  it.  Thus  for  1500 
years  infant  baptism  remained  in  the  Church 
almost  untouched  by  any  opposers. 

CHILDREN  ALWAYS  INCLUDED. 

There  is  one  other  argument  I  would  like 
to  touch  if  time  permitted.  I  can  only  al- 
lude to  it. 

In  all  God's  dealings  with  men  the  chil- 
dren are  included. 


*  Bible  Baptism,  p.  330. 


74  SCRIPTURE    BAPTISM. 

When  Adam   and  Eve  were  placed  in  the 
garden  of  Eden  their  children   would,  with- 
out doubt,  have  been  partakers  of  its  bless- 
ings  if    our  first  parents    had     not   sinned, 
against  God. 

When  the  parents  were  driven  out  the 
children  were  excluded  with  them.  When 
the  death  of  the  parents  was  pronounced,  the 
death  of  the  children  was  pronounced  also. 

When  Noah  was  saved,  his  children  were 
saved  also,  although  says  God,  "  thee  only 
have  I  found  righteous." 

When  all  the  parents,  except  Noah,  were 
drowned  in  the  flood,  their  children  perish- 
ed with  them. 

When  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  were  destroy- 
ed, the  children  perished  also. 

When  Abraham  was  chosen,  his  children 
also  were  chosen. 

When  Lot  was  rescued,  his  children  also 
were  rescued. 

But  I  will  not  dwell.  The  New  Testa- 
ment is  a  ''better  covenant  with  better  pro- 
mises— reason  says  it  canrot  exclude  our 
children. 


SCRIPTURE  BAPTISM.  ^^ 

THE    SUMMING  UP. 

Look  in  conclusion  to  the  summing  up  of 
the  argument. 

See  how  it  rises  step  by  step  until  we  are 
driven  to  the  conclusion  that  duty  requires 
that  believing  parenty  should  consecrate 
t/ieir  children  by  baptism  to  God. 
1st.  The  Church  is  the  same. 
2nd.  Infant  membership  was  commaitded 
under  the  Jewish  form  of  the  Church. 

3rd.  The  command    has  never    been  re- 
voked, and  therefore  it  must  be  our  duty  still. 
Open  now  the  New  Testament  and  see 
how  it  confirms  this  conclusion. 

There  is  no  intimation  of  any  who  doubt- 
ed the  duty,  except  the  apostles,  on  one  oc- 
casion, and  with  them  the  Savior  was  "much 
displeased"  on  this  account,  and  command- 
ed that  none  should  forbid,  but  suffer  the 
little  children  to  come  to  Him. 

When  Jesus  had  gone  up  and  sent  down 
the  Spirit  which  was  to  fully  qualify  the 
apostles  for  their  work,  hear  Peter  in  the 
first  sermon  repeat  it :  *'  The  promise  is  to 
you  and  your  children'' 


76  SCRIPTURE   BAPTISM. 

Look  into  Paul's  epistles  and  see  how  often 
he  repeats  the  promise  and  shows  its  ap- 
plication to  us  gentiles. 

See  how  the  right  of  infant  membership 
agrees  with  the  analogy  of  the  Church  in 
every  age. 

See  the  apostles  practicing  it  in  every 
case  when  any  family  is  mentioned.  Add 
to  all  this  the  wiivcisal  practice  of  the 
Church  for  1 100  years,  and,  with  but  one 
exception,  for  1500  years,  and  say  what 
evidences  could  be  stronger  or  more  con- 
clusive ? 

It  is  inesistable.  Every  believing  parent 
ought  to  have  the  seal  of  the  covenant  af- 
fixed to  his  child,  and  thus  claim  the  pro- 
mise of  which  we  are  heirs,  "  I  will  be  a 
God  to  thee  and  to  thy  seed  after  thee;" 
and  it  is  a  sin  to  neglect  it. 

And  now  may  God's  blessing  be  upon  us 
all,  without  regard  to  names  or  denomina- 
tions. I  have  defended  our  opinion  because 
I  believed  the  interests  of  truth  demanded  it; 
but  I  bear  no  unkind  feeling  toward  any;  I 
have   carefully   tried   to  avoid    every    un- 


SCRIPTURE  BAPTISM.  // 

charitable  word  or  thought ;  and  my  sincere 
prayer  is  that  the  controversy  of  this  day 
may  be  so  blessed  of  God  that  we  may 
have  more  charity  about  these  noii-essoitials 
of  our  faith,  and  more  cordially  embrace 
each  other  in  Christian  fellowship  and  love. 
,If  such  an  end  shall  be  accomplished,  I 
will  have  my  reward,  and  to  God  will  I  give 
the  praise. 


FINIS, 


Date  Due                       1 

Mi  2  7'.S-> 

MLZLu, 

^A^^^l 

%> 

J 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Ubrary 


11012  010214700    _^^ 


